Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA VI

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    3. Gangs

    1. Announcements

    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

Should the next GTA be more serious?


UAL

Recommended Posts

Kris194
8 hours ago, ChiroVette said:

Honestly?

 

I pre-ordered the game, the Digital Special Edition, I think it was. The version with the Season Pass and the extra pre-order bonuses? Whatever that one was. Truth is, I was sorry I bought it the SECOND I started reading the reviews, and realized that in essence, this game was pretty much GTA IV: The Western Edition. lol I would have gotten a refund, but I made the mistake of pre-ordering it and downloading it on PSN. If it were Steam or XBox Live, I would have gotten my money back easily and immediately, as Steam gives you like 2 hours to play it or something, and I think its similar with XBox Live? But PSN had a loophole I wasn't aware of, and apparently because I "downloaded" the game onto my PS4 Pro, I was no longer eligible for a refund. Even though I didn't even so much as boot the game up for 5 seconds. Oh well, my loss. I have still not even so much as booted up the game, even though I think I paid (lol) $69.99 for the Special Edition. My fault for not reading between the lines, but I have never played RDR2 even once, even though its sitting in my library. I actually deleted it off my PS4 to make room on my hard drive for other games, because it was just taking up space, but theoretically, I could re-download it and play it any time I want.

 

I just don't want to.

That would explain a lot. In my opinion you just don't like more drama than action movie stories in games or you may be too young/immature to appreciate them. Saying, that RDR 2 is like "GTA IV: Western edition" showed that you don't have any idea about Red Dead Redemption 2.

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Zello
4 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

That would explain a lot. In my opinion you just don't like more drama than action movie stories in games or you may be too young/immature to appreciate them. 

You don't know ChiroVette. ChiroVette is old.

Edited by Zello
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
8 minutes ago, Zello said:

You don't know ChiroVette. ChiroVette is old.

I think he's roughly the same age as I am.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
1 hour ago, Kris194 said:

That would explain a lot. In my opinion you just don't like more drama than action movie stories in games or you may be too young/immature to appreciate them. Saying, that RDR 2 is like "GTA IV: Western edition" showed that you don't have any idea about Red Dead Redemption 2.

 

Yeah lol @Zello is right, I'm no kid. That said, I think you're imparting waaaaay too much into my position on not only IV, but my opinions about RDR2. You also seem to assume that I don't like drama or something? With all due respect, that's even more uninformed than my uninformed opinion about RDR2 without playing it. I also think that you're presuming an awful lot about my preferences and tastes in movies, books, and TV shows based on how I see videogames. Although, in your defense, you didn't quite say anything about movies and books. So my response to you is NOT entirely to you, but also the topic, because you did say "games." Let me be absolutely clear, I LOVE reading Shakespeare, and I love even somber and morbidly depressing literature like many of the Greek Tragedies I remember reading from college. Everything from Dante's Inferno, which is a very dark piece, to lets say East of Eden (the book, more than the movie) and that story has some seriously epic tragedy in it, which spans generations. Steibeck was a f*cking genius. And while I hate IV's story, it isn't because its "dark" or its "gritty" or its too dramatic, or whatever pat excuses people just love to impart to my opinions in this forum (not saying you're doing that) it is a much more nuanced discussion than that, and I am tired of the out-of-hand assumption that the only thing I am ever open to is "comedy" and "action" in a game's story.

 

This is not a discussion about RDR2, and I apologize to the mods if I participated in dragging this thread off topic, but I honestly and truly think that this particular facet of the topic is also a GREAT illustration of the differences between IV and V, and what I want out of VI, as well as what I love about GTA as a franchise. So I will suit up once again! lol not for a fight this time, but to clarify. 

 

So here is the huge tl;dr wall-o-text explanation. There are reasons I should probably not have purchased RDR2, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with being some ignorant kid with an attention span like a gnat. I am quite sure I am one of the oldest people in this forum, but that's another conversation. The reason that GTA IV as a story turns me off has nothing whatsoever to do with the "darkness" or the so called "gritty drama." It just isn't done very well. Which, by the way, in and of itself, I would have been totally fine with! Seriously, I don't give a sh*t how poorly written the tired, old gangster cliches are in IV. I don't give a rat's ass how obnoxiously pompous Rockstar was with the writing, and how they desperately tried to sell GTA IV as a "movie game" waaaaaaay back in 2007 and 2008 leading up to the release of the game. I don't care how predictable and unlikable Roman, Michelle, Kate are, and how low into the dregs of B and C grade voice talent Rockstar cast their net in to bag actors and actresses that very often sounded only slightly above the level of the talent you would find in a Junior High School production of The Sound of Music. I really don't! it's a f*cking videogame, and even IV's story would have been fine. Admittedly just as sh*tty and poorly written and acted as V's.

 

Yes, V was sh*tty too! Shocked right? So was III, VC, SA, VCS, and LCS. They're all videogames. And if you want me to date myself now, let me say from personal experience from when the games FIRST came out in the arcades, that I truly find the discussion and arguments about IV's story versus V's story to be a lot like if when I was a kid playing Ms Pacman for the first time, and I'm literally trying to imagine my friends and I arguing over which game has a better story, Ms. PacMan or f*cking Centipede! LMAO its totally freaking absurd to me. As much as I LOVE the debate, because it really is a lot of fun suiting up for a fight in this forum, the whole concept of videogames having epic stories is so ridiculous that while my bit of 1980s hyperbole aside, because those games really didn't have a discernible story at all, I think its a fundamentally crazy debate. The acting, writing, and voice talent in ANY GTA game is so far below the level of both great comedy (V) and serious drama (IV) that it makes no sense to me to actually defend one over the other from that standpoint alone. It really is like having half a conversation, and honestly the wrong half! To me, arguing over the story in GTA V versus IV is truly a lot like if we were to have a voracious argument over which is more nutritious and healthy, a giant Carvel ice cream sundae, or a slice of pizza, coke, and a piece of chocolate cake. Its actually freaking insane in a way.

 

Here is the nutshell version of my argument. I hate, and I mean absolutely hate the way that IV and the Crapisodes play, as videogames, in terms of mission variety, restrictive physics, poorly designed, repetitive gameplay, and the sense that the so-called sandbox in IV and its DLC is literally made out of cast iron. V, on the other hand, has absolutely fantastic gameplay, a wonderfully immersive and huge map to explore with a lot of eye candy, and a sense of being able to just really get lost in it. Yes, I love the mountains, too, though, particularly for flying over and bicycle/Sanchez riding. I love the reward system, I love the missions, the gunplay, the driving, the flying, and on and on. But here's the thing: If I hated the gameplay and "feel" of the game as much as I hated it in GTA IV, I would have no use for V's story. See, I ONLY like V's story as an adjunct to the game. Because while I am playing the game the story is a fantastic adjunct or background. But objectively speaking, I know that V is no better, writing-wise than IV. And gasp IV is no objectively worse than any other GTA game, in terms of story, voice acting. writing, and such. You think I wouldn't welcome drama in a game? Really great drama that sucks you in and makes you even brings tears to your eyes? Jeeze, no way!

 

I would welcome videogames hiring the kind of voice talent that they got for any one of the Godfather movies, or Goodfellas. I would welcome the kind of dark, gritty writing that came with actors like Brando, Pacino, Talia Shire, Caan, Keaton Duvall, Vogota and the rest of these all stars. Pesce, DeNiro, Liotta, Sorvino and on and on. I would welcome the kind of epic writing that those productions have in a videogame, were any game to have that kind of talented writers and actors. I thought Liotta was a great choice in VC, to be honest. But again, mediocre videogame writing is not made up for completely even by one, solitary, lone all star. It really isn't. Not even in VC. But these games are so much damned fun to me, and GTA IV just isn't. So I can't simply forgive IV's story as being just a videogame since it comes along with a sh*tty game and an overbearing, restrictive f*ck-fest of realism foisted on the player like some con artist that promises the world and just takes your money.

 

You know, all this talk about how serious IV is and how "V tries too hard" is a joke to me. I truly only participate in this complete and utter nonsense because its fun to debate you guys! But in the end, both positions, my usual position as well, is a joke. IV is, to my way of thinking, a completely crap gameplay experience. Therefore the story seems worse to me than it actually is. While V is a freaking blast to play, with a ton of fun, looser and more arcade-like physics, while still not being completely over the top like Saints Row 3 or 4. So V's story seems great. If IV had the kind of wild, over-the-top fun and excitement, and the gameplay was a rip-roaring good time, I would probably have enjoyed the more somber tone of it as much as I enjoyed the sh*tty story of V; as much as I enjoyed the sh*tty stories of III, VC, SA, LCS, and VCS. I even enjoyed the admittedly more sh*tty stories of all the Saints Row games, and Volition doesn't even have access to the kind of writing and acting talent that Rockstar does. If GTA games are filled to the brim with Grade B and C actors and writers, Saints Row is like Grade D. Yet I enjoy those stories, too. Strangely enough.

 

Dovetailing back to RDR2, the reasons I am quite sure I won't like that game are because reading the professional reviews, as well as many of the fan comments about the title, as well as its predecessor RDR, led me to realize that the game plays more like GTA IV with a western theme. Once I knew that, I realized that the slow traveling on horseback, the lack of cars, the lack of modern technology, the lack of 21'st century and even late 20th century weapons, gadgets, and modes of travel make the whole thing completely unappealing to me. How can I possibly care about the story when the game itself sounds like a real bore to me? Now, if guys in Hollywood that really are heavy hitters ever decided to write and produce videogame stories; if they could get a full cast of some of the best talent in Hollywood, then sure, I'm in. I wasn't a fan of Godfather 3 but that movie did a lot right. One of the most poignant scenes in the entire trilogy was near the end when Michael Corleone is in the Vatican, and is sort of snookered by one of the Cardinals to give an impromptu confession. The regret, the horror, the desperate search for redemption from a man whose desire for power in the Italian community caused him to assassinate his own brother for simply being hapless and making very bad decisions was one of the most beautifully written tragedies I have ever seen. So, yeah, I'm all for the ambition to make games like movies. But, as I said in my first post, until Rockstar and other videogame companies can come up with scenes that you would find in classic mobster movies, read by actors and actresses that are Academy Award winners and candidates, I only participate in these idiotic debates for the pure fun of it. Because my position in defending V is truly just as ludicrous as those extroling the virtues of the story of IV. Because none of this is Shakespear, Steinbeck, Twain, or even Coppola or Spielberg. Its more like a Junior High School production of some obscure play that nobody cares about except for the parents of these little troupes.

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
1 hour ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

I think he's roughly the same age as I am.

I didn't blow you off. You made some good comments in your posts on the previous page I want to respond to. But I got sucked down the rabbit-hole of my last post, so I really need to lift now. I'll respond to you after I'm done working out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
4 hours ago, ChiroVette said:

I didn't blow you off. You made some good comments in your posts on the previous page I want to respond to. But I got sucked down the rabbit-hole of my last post, so I really need to lift now. I'll respond to you after I'm done working out.

I think it is the right time to tell you that I'm not sure why you went all out like that on @Algonquin Assassin for the whole IV and V story thing when he was only responding to @DexMacLeod. You should be responding more to the latter than former IMO. I mean it's same mistake you did in regards to @iiCriminnaaL 49 , thinking he was (not sarcastically) calling someone racist when someone else started the whole argument. Not to mention you finding out while debating with @Algonquin Assassin that he ain't the unreasonable IV fanboy worshipper you assume him to be and pushed poor Niko into a war he didn't wanna be a part of.....so this whole you being "out of loop" both in short term and long term, really hurts your arguments IMO.

That said, I think you need to let go of the whole IV fanboy boogeyman thing going on just saying.

Furthermore I wanna state my opinion on V which will be very controversial for you but I prefer my video games to have less serious stories and more fun gameplay. V offers neither in a satisfying way. IMO, V is the first Rockstar game I have an issue with, heck IMO GTAO is ten times more the game V is. So even with the whole "video game gotta be fun" mentality, there are still people out there who think V isn't a good game, gameplay or storywise.......without them needing to be labelled off as some IV fanboys who worship GTA IV as some golden standard of gaming.....because truth be told, as someone who enjoyed GTA games since III, I never asked for IV, but Rockstar made me love it (sign of a great developer if you ask me)......too bad that was not case with V - call me a hypocrite but I think III, VC, SA, IV, EFLC, GTAO are far better in gameplay/story than V. I'm not gonna try to argue on that since this isn't the right thread (nor am I interested) but for those a bit "out of loop", opinions like mine do exist is all I wanna say.

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194

@ChiroVette I wrote "games" to make sure, that you don't assume, that I made assumptions and you still did it. Regarding OT, well, considering title of this topic it's pretty obvious, that we'll be discussing our "taste" and so on. I think, that it shouldn't be any problem as long as we keep discussing, not shoveling sh*t in each other faces like we're 3 years old and in sandbox at playground. I also think, that you shouldn't compare games stories to movies. Movie is up to 3 hours long, games are way, way longer. Moreover, you don't need to suit up for fight every time you post, I guess, that you really talked way too much with fanboys. Nonetheless, thank you for your long but interesting to read post, It really explained a lot.

Edited by Kris194
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
28 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

@ChiroVette I wrote "games" to make sure, that you don't assume, that I made assumptions and you still did it.

 Really? Did I? Or did I also write this? Which you missed in the post you were responding to:

 

Quote

Although, in your defense, you didn't quite say anything about movies and books. So my response to you is NOT entirely to you, but also the topic, because you did say "games."

Care to try again?

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194

Let's just end this discussion here, it doesn't make sense to drag it. I'll just say, that for me Rockstar found perfect balance in RDR 2 between game being serious and "funny" at the same time. Main story was very serious but game as a whole? Not as much as some people seem to think. Just for example

 

 

 

I will probably remember "Ring dang do" song and getting drunk with Lenny for quite a long time :D

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
7 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

Let's just end this discussion here, it doesn't make sense to drag it. I'll just say, that for me Rockstar found perfect balance in RDR 2 between game being serious and "funny" at the same time. Main story was very serious but game as a whole? Not as much as some people seem to think. Just for example

 

I agree with not dragging it out. We each said out piece. As for "Serious and funny at the same time," let's be honest, some people have been saying that about GTA IV for the past 12 years. I don't buy it then, nor do I now. But that said, I will repeat my main point, which is since I believe all videogame stories I have ever experienced are fundamentally weak compared to real writing, then I'm back to my initial admittedly uninformed reasons for not ever dusting off RDR2 and playing it. Because if the gameplay sucks, and the physics are weighty, heavy, restrictive, and neutered by a 19th century environment and pre-automobile technology, then the story couldn't possibly be good enough to hold my interest. At least based on the myriad of videos I have seen on Youtube, as well as the ones you posted. I guess if a game ever came out that had writing, story, and acting as good as a high end Hollywood production, perhaps then I would be willing to overlook sh*tty gameplay and restrictive physics, because the story will suck me in so immensely that I would literally HAVE TO see what happens next.

 

So far, no game has been able to do that for me. Because the stories simply aren't good enough to make up for a lackluster gaming experience. Now since this is potentially controversial, I will say that I am only giving my opinion about gameplay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194
33 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

I agree with not dragging it out. We each said out piece. As for "Serious and funny at the same time," let's be honest, some people have been saying that about GTA IV for the past 12 years. I don't buy it then, nor do I now.

You don't have to agree with it but IMO it's quite true. Story was pretty serious but there were still characters like Brucie for example or McReary brothers. You also have funny commercials and so on on the radio. In previous installments I loved listening to those but in V? I don't care about them because game as a whole is way more than enough "funny" to the point where I'm tired of this "fun".

 

edit

 

I forgot to mention introduced with GTA IV TV shows, also funny :)

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
8 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

You don't have to agree with it but IMO it's quite true. Story was pretty serious but there were still characters like Brucie for example or McReary brothers. You also have funny commercials and so on on the radio. In previous installments I loved listening to those but in V? I don't care about it because game as a whole is way more than enough "funny" to the point where I'm tired of this "fun".

To be fair that's not an outstanding sales pitch since it can work just as well for IV.....and we all know how that ended up as.

But I like the writing in Red Dead games, even though I haven't played them yet but what I seen so far, IV and them are kinda siblings. Both IV and RD games don't aim to be too serious, just a story with some occasional humor. It also helps that RDR2 is more colorful than IV/RDR so it does have that welcoming feel you get from SA/VC/V so it has a better chance of having the right balance of serious/fun than other R* games.

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheatz/Trickz
6 hours ago, Zello said:

You don't know ChiroVette. ChiroVette is old.


He just likes more shallow, casual oriented games that forego realism for his idea of “fun” i.e. Chiro prefers the ability to have all vehicles no matter what class go from 0-60 in a second because it is “fun”, as opposed to a car building up speed realistically as per its class. Or carry all weapons with countless ammo reserves at once because it is “fun” to be completely overpowered, as opposed to playing a game that balances the odds to provide an actual challenge to overcome. God forbid he need to reload after each shot in RDR because the guns are era appropriate. He needs to shoot now dammit! 

 

That’s a slight exaggeration about the car speed, GTA V is not that bad. There are still some realistic aspects, which he’s stated are actually what he dislikes about V. 

Edited by Cheatz/Trickz
  • KEKW 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Orbea Occam

ChiroVette is one of those guys that wants GTA games to be Online only from now on.

  • KEKW 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheatz/Trickz
13 hours ago, GR7 said:

It sh*ts all over GTAIV+V storywise. You're doing yourself a serious disservice not experiencing it. Like I said it's one of the only games endings that have taken me days to not think about. They did a good job.


It sh*ts on V’s story because everything does, it’s equally as well written as IV’s. But...it is much better structured than IV’s which is mostly down to Rockstar’s getting better at gameplay and story segregation, so I understand how you made that mistake. And you’re forgiven. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
2 hours ago, Cheatz/Trickz said:


He just likes more shallow, casual oriented games that forego realism for his idea of “fun” i.e.

 

Not true, but I'm so happy to see that you still have the same predilection for misrepresenting the position of your opponent in the single most lowbrow manner in order to distract that you actually have no rebuttal for my argument. If you actually believe all of those things in your post, which I'm sure you don't, then you're even more dull and myopic than even I think you are. And LMAO that's truly saying something.

 

By the way? Not one of the things you said in that straw man argument of a post is actually true. Nothing but wild-eyed hyperbole from a typical fractional minority IV fan who still continues to exist in the past, extolling the hack virtues of literally the only GTA game to actually suck. Seriously, the world makes sense when people like you continue to argue in such a gutter-sniping way. Carry on. 🤣

 

Edit: By the way, you do realize that you are now coming up on 7 years of being part of your tiny, little minority of IV fans still whinging and bitching about V, right? And when VI comes out, and I promise you it will be a lot more like V than and San Andreas than IV, what then? At that point, it will be...wait for it......15 or more years since GTA was the game that you and your little disgruntled, whining minority want it to be? I literally can't wait to see VI's launch when you get to endure, what? Another 8 years of hoping for some boring entry into the series like you got in 2008? I intend to stay around here just for that moment. That alone will be worth the cost of admission! Hey, cheer up! When Rockstar makes VI even more OTT, you'll always have 2030 to look forward to, dude! Just take it on the chin, you'll be fine!

 

Edit 2: Ha! I truly forgot how much fun you are to spar with.

 

2 hours ago, Kris194 said:

You don't have to agree with it but IMO it's quite true. Story was pretty serious but there were still characters like Brucie for example or McReary brothers. You also have funny commercials and so on on the radio. In previous installments I loved listening to those but in V? I don't care about them because game as a whole is way more than enough "funny" to the point where I'm tired of this "fun".

 

edit

 

I forgot to mention introduced with GTA IV TV shows, also funny :)

The story was certainly "serious" in the sense that it had less humor and antics than literally any other GTA game. But you and others seem to confuse serious with good. IV may be serious in tone and tenor, but the writing is still every bit as video-gamey as any other GTA, V included. I can deal with typical videogame-fare for a story. As I said, I certainly don't expect Scorcese or Coppola from a videogame. But if the story has a standard, meh videogame story and sh*tty, restrictive, repetitive, boring ass gameplay, then the mediocre story is certainly not enough to suck me into the world. V's story may be lighter and less serious than IV's, but in all honesty, its no better. Yeah, I like it a lot better, and I think the voiceovers in V are a lot better, but that's opinion. The real difference between "serious" IV and zany V isn't that the story of one is better than the other objectively. But V is a fun game, and that gets me into the story of the game. But rest assured, if V's gameplay was as sh*tty and uninspired as IV's, I would hate V, and would likely dislike the story as well.

 

Its a videogame, NOT a video-movie with some gameplay is my point. Hey, the day that videogames get writers, actors, and other talent at the same level as Hollywood blockbusters, that will change for me. If there really was a game that told a story, say as good as Goodfellas, Godfather I and II, and other blockbusters, maybe then I will be able to overlook sh*tty gameplay. Until then, I stand by my statement that some pompous, self-indulgent attempt to appear edgy and dark (ala GTA IV) is not nearly enough story or movie to make me overlook the ya know...game. lol

 

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
35 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

 And when VI comes out, and I promise you it will be a lot more like V

No please. I beg of you.

 

35 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

more like.....San Andreas than IV, what then?

Yes yes yes please.

Though on the serious note, I fear RDR2 will interfere with this promise, it has grown very popular and in best case scenario it will influence that next GTA game to some extent and worst case scenario is.....it will be the entire foundation for it. GTA series definitely needs to step away from IV and RD games (and especially from V which still has remains of IV shoved up its rear). It needs to aim for how it was back in 3D era IMO.

Edited by Ryo256
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
5 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

No please. I beg of you.

 

Yes yes yes please.

Though on the serious note, I fear RDR2 will interfere with this promise, it has grown very popular and in best case scenario it will influence that next GTA game to some extent and worst case scenario is.....it will be the entire foundation for it. GTA series definitely needs to step away from IV and RD games (and especially from V which still has remains of IV shoved up its rear). It needs to aim for how it was back in 3D era IMO.

 

Ha! Are you posting a parody of me? LMAO if so, well done, I love it! If not, then I agree 100%. GTA is not supposed to be realistic in the way that clearly RDR2 (sorry to speak without having played it yet) are. I honestly think that Rockstar needs to lean even more heavily into a truly epic next-gen San Andreas, in whatever city/state/country they choose for the location. I love V, but it leaned a little too much into IV for my tastes. But a true next gen San Andreas would be fabulous!

 

Hell, I'll make you a meaningless deal, since neither of us have the authority to make this decision: If GTA VI is as wild, wacky, and OTT as San Andreas, only on the PS5/XBox Series X, then they can make the damned story as serious, depressing, and whatever the hell they want! I will go on record saying, for that game I would even be so ecstatic that I wouldn't care if they raise Johnny K from the dead (and Trevor's shoe), bring back Niko, and even Roman!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194
16 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

It needs to aim for how it was back in 3D era IMO.

3D era GTA had barely any story compared to HD era GTA. And please, just no.

 

 

6 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

If GTA VI is as wild, wacky, and OTT as San Andreas, only on the PS5/XBox Series X,


We already have this in GTA V, it's way more OTT than even San Andreas...

Edited by Kris194
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
2 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

3D era GTA had barely any story compared to HD era GTA. And please, just no.

I think you're misinterpreting what he's saying. If I may, I believe he is talking purely about gameplay. Also, I think the stories of all the HD era games are excellent. But you have to grade them on a curve given the PS2's resources.

4 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

 

 


We already have this in GTA V, it's way more OTT than even San Andreas...

I don't think so. At least not the SP. I see what you're saying, though, given three switchable protagonists and some other things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194

I know but still

 

gta-iii-and-iv-script-comparison.jpg

 

First GTA, that had some sort of "bigger" story was San Andreas.

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
9 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

I think you're misinterpreting what he's saying. If I may, I believe he is talking purely about gameplay. Also, I think the stories of all the HD era games are excellent. But you have to grade them on a curve given the PS2's resources.

You are absolutely right that I was mostly looking into the gameplay. However I would go one step ahead of myself and say in my opinion, for a GTA game, VC's and SA's stories kept me engaged as well, again for a GTA game.

Problem that even with how much I love IV's story. Both IV and V do distract me from the gameplay. I mean I just want characters that are on board with crime and want to have fun. I mean Trevor was sooooo close to be being the perfect GTA protagonist and they made him into this.....unlike-able whining douchebag that hate people instead of just some badass that's willing to cause chaos. 

We need more charismatic trouble-causing fun characters instead of the downers from IV. I do like how Tommy and CJ didn't mind just going with it , and that's what they do in gameplay-wise....maybe CJ's whining can be an argument but CJ did get things done. Whereas in IV and V, characters either get things done but don't like it OR claim about getting things done but don't really deliver.

I hope that makes sense, @Kris194. Again I don't think it will happen in VI but that's just how I like it.

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
7 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

I know but still

 

 

First GTA, that had some sort of bigger story was San Andreas.

No, okay, I thought I made this clear already, but that's why I said graded on a curve. Sorry about the confusion. Look, the PS2 didn't have the kinds of resources that could accommodate the huge map, the myriad sandbox gameplay, AND have a story that the developers put so much money and energy into. When he and I say "like San Andreas" we're talking about truly an epic next gen version commensurate with the coming consoles and ever-evolving PC tech. Nobody, least of all me, wants the series to go back to a story that can barely fit on the PS2. Of course, the script should be as massive as that one. For all my complaints about IV, as your picture illustrates, Rockstar worked incredibly hard on that script, and should work even harder on the next one.

 

Edit: Also none of the 3D Era GTA games had anywhere near the budget of GTA IV or V.

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194
9 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

You are absolutely right that I was mostly looking into the gameplay. However I would go one step ahead of myself and say in my opinion, for a GTA game, VC's and SA's stories kept me engaged as well, again for a GTA game.

Problem that even with how much I love IV's story. Both IV and V do distract me from the gameplay. I mean I just want characters that are on board with crime and want to have fun. I mean Trevor was sooooo close to be being the perfect GTA protagonist and they made him into this.....unlike-able whining douchebag that hate people instead of just some guy badass that's willing to cause chaos. 

We need more charismatic trouble-causing fun characters instead of the downers from IV. I do like how Tommy and CJ didn't mind just going with it , and that's what they do in gameplay-wise....maybe CJ's whining can be an argument but CJ did get things done. Whereas in IV and V, characters either get things done but don't like it OR claim about getting things done but don't really deliver.

I hope that makes sense, @Kris194. Again I don't think it will happen in VI but that's just how i like it.

I understand and I respect your opinion, it's just opinion after all. Personally I would never like to go back to 3D era GTA, it just doesn't work in 2020, neither in terms of story or gameplay.

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
1 minute ago, Kris194 said:

I understand and I respect your opinion, it's just opinion after all. Personally I would never like to go back to 3D era GTA, it just doesn't work in 2020, neither in terms of story or gameplay.

Okay, just to play Devil's Advocate here, since I haven't played it, doesn't GTAO prove the reverse is true? As for story, I kind of agree with you. Clearly you proved that point with the picture of the massive script you posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
2 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

I understand and I respect your opinion, it's just opinion after all. Personally I would never like to go back to 3D era GTA, it just doesn't work in 2020, neither in terms of story or gameplay.

That's understandable but you may agree when I say that GTA series is currently facing an identity crisis. In 3d era, I think R* understood what they wanted out of the series but right now, it seems it has become unclear. 

For someone like me who have enjoyed every GTA game since III, for someone who even ate up IV despite it being a black sheep, was disappointed with V. Which is a problem because I considered myself a GTA fanboy who never thought to ever criticize a Rockstar game. If GTA games are not winning people like me over then there is a serious problem we need to address. I'm okay with whatever direction they go or whatever identity they give to VI but please, R* commit to it. Don't give us another V which seems like a disfigured child of IV and SA.

It also doesn't help that GTAO introduced the flying bike nonsense, since if that is canon sh*t then GTA HD universe is more f*cked beyond any realism we may hope for. We might be going more into Saints Row than 3D era if I am bold to say so.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
28 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

That's understandable but you may agree when I say that GTA series is currently facing an identity crisis. In 3d era, I think R* understood what they wanted out of the series but right now, it seems it has become unclear. 

For someone like me who have enjoyed every GTA game since III, for someone who even ate up IV despite it being a black sheep, was disappointed with V. Which is a problem because I considered myself a GTA fanboy who never thought to ever criticize a Rockstar game. If GTA games are not winning people like me over then there is a serious problem we need to address. I'm okay with whatever direction they go or whatever identity they give to VI but please, R* commit to it. Don't give us another V which seems like a disfigured child of IV and SA.

It also doesn't help that GTAO introduced the flying bike nonsense, since if that is canon sh*t then GTA HD universe is more f*cked beyond any realism we may hope for. We might be going more into Saints Row than 3D era if I am bold to say so.

And my regret continues as you mention flying bikes!! sh*t, what in the hell have I been missing the past 7 years? f*ck me, I'm an idiot. (Have fun with this admission, Cheatz!)

 

That said, I think you bring up valid points about an identity crisis within the franchise. Maybe its time for Saints Row and Just Cause to pick up the mantle of wacky, OTT, is maybe a little of what you're saying? Sort of. I just don't want to see GTA go back to the physics and gameplay of IV. Do I want to see a spectacular story that would truly be the very first GTA game to not have a video-gamey story? Sure. But to do that, the company would have to have the budget not only for a stellar, next gen, remarkable gamplay experience, BUT would also have to have top of the line Hollywood writers, voice actors, directors, and producers, which would mean that they would need I'm guessing a budget for only the story parts of the game that exceeded $100 Million. Not even factoring in gameplay budget. Right now, the best videogames simply don't have the talent, not even Rockstar. Not because Rokcstar sucks or Dan Houser is a sh*tty writer, because even though he left, clearly he isn't. But the "story" part of GTA is just that. A part of GTA, and I'm quite certain that more dev resources at this point go into the the maps, art, gameplay, physics, mechanics, gaming motifs, and mission variety than can ever go into the "movie" part of the game.

Edited by ChiroVette
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194
42 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

That's understandable but you may agree when I say that GTA series is currently facing an identity crisis.

This is something I can definitely agree with. That's how I see GTA V.

 4ea.jpg

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
25 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

And my regret continues as you mention flying bikes!! sh*t, what in the hell have I been missing the past 7 ears? f*ck me, I'm an idiot.

 

That said, I think you bring up valid points about an identity crisis within the franchise. Maybe its time for Saints Row and Just Cause to pick up the mantle of wacky, OTT, is maybe a little of what you're saying? Sort of. I just don't want to see GTA go back to the physics and gameplay of IV. Do I want to see a spectacular story that would truly be the very first GTA game to not have a video-gamey story? Sure. But to do that, the company would have to have the budget not only for a stellar, next gen, remarkable gamplay experience, BUT would also have to have top of the line Hollywood writers, voice actors, directors, and producers, which would mean that they would need I'm guessing a budget for only the story parts of the game that exceeded $100 Million. Right now, the best videogames simply don't have the talent, not even Rockstar. Not because Rokcstar sucks or Dan Houser is a sh*tty writer, because even though he left, clearly he isn't. But the "story" part of GTA is just that. A part of GTA, and I'm quite certain that more dev resources at this point go into the the maps, art, gameplay, physics, mechanics, gaming motifs, and mission variety than can ever go into the "movie" part of the game.


Look I'll make it simple for you.

f*ck the story.  I love IV, to the point where I might even keep playing it over and over until I die. But f*ck this obsession with great stories in video game. It is very thing that ruins V actually. There's more cutscenes than actual gameplay in it if I were to exaggerate to illustrate my point.......and for what? Some misguided attempt at giving us a story?

They should have just made Franklin a stereotypical gangbanger, Michael into a smartass bank robber and Trevor into a badass military guy and leave it at that......and guess what? People would still love it to the grave. But nooo, for the sake of story, for the sake of some realism crap, we had to grind heist garbage that paid little for the whole game as some FIB slaves with retarded protagonists (sorry if anyone loves them). I wanted Michael to accept that he loves chaos and to embrace the crime life he is shown to do in his trailer but you know what? It doesn't happen until the story is over......AWESOME /s because of some misguided priority towards a narrative, because if Michael were to be as I envisioned him, he would be boring and there would nothing to develop? Nah screw that sh*t because I tell you what, it would have been more fun, he would have been remembered better as a protagonist than he is today rather than a spineless betraying washed up whining old man with a sh*t family.

As for the gameplay, I think we can keep the physics from V the way they are and just polish out some of the rough edges like not flying across a few miles when trying to hit a ped with a instant knockout punch or cars feeling like tanks (give em a little realistic damage effects). Also for mission design, can we have less of towing cars and Trevor walking slow as hell in scouting the port mission and more of Franklin shooting at Grove Street and Biltz Heist shootout? Oh also give us more rewards and money for doing anything in the game? Because in V, you get almost nothing (except for some heists) and even the 100% reward is garbage compared to previous GTA games.

We just need to take care all of that and VI would be a great GTA game. And please, R* stop prioritizing a good story, just make a solid single-player game.....even if the story is sh*t, I'll just propaganda enough lies myself across the internet to make everyone believe the story was good, just make the gameplay good enough.
 

Edited by Ryo256
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194

What you seem to ask about means scrapping everything what Rockstar achieved for the last 12 years, huge, huge downgrade to the series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.